578
Where to go now since Linux is mainstream (lemmy.today)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
325 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I can't even feel superior to everyone when theirs so many arch installers!! I use real arch btw. I thought "I guess I should go to Gentoo" but then wait, CHROMEOS IS A GENTOO INSTALLER!

I feel like we only have two options now

  1. Ascend to BSD-land
  2. Ironically supporting Windows Unironically

edit: I have decided to replace my debian laptop with BSD

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 11 points 7 months ago (1 child)

The file system thing is really cool, are their downsides of implementing it like that? Curious why Linux would not implement something like that

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    I think there are a couple of reasons. First, the Linux kernel doesn’t support resource forks at all. They aren’t part of POSIX nor do they really fit the unix file philosophy. Second, most of the cool things that BeFS enables are very end user desktop oriented, and Linux leaves that desktop environments, not the kernel. BeOS was designed as a fully integrated desktop os, not a multiuser server os. Finally, I expect that they are a security headache, as they present this whole other place that malware could be stored. Imagine an innocent looking plain text file that has an evil payload sitting in an attribute.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    First, the Linux kernel doesn’t support resource forks at all. They aren’t part of POSIX nor do they really fit the unix file philosophy.

    The resource fork isn't gonna be really meaningful to essentially all Linux software, but there have been ways to access filesystems that do have resource forks. IIRC, there was some client to mount some Apple file server protocol, exposed the resource forks as a file with a different name and the data fork as just a regular file.

    https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/filesystems/hfsplus.html

    Linux does support HFS+, which has resource forks, as the hfsplus driver, so I imagine that it provides access one way or another.

    searches

    https://superuser.com/questions/363602/how-to-access-resource-fork-of-hfs-filesystem-on-linux

    Add /..namedfork/rsrc to the end of the file name to access the resource fork.

    Also, pretty esoteric, but NTFS, the current Windows file system, also has a resource fork, though it's not typically used.

    searches

    Ah, the WP article that OP, @evol@lemmy.today linked to describes it.

    The Windows NT NTFS can support forks (and so can be a file server for Mac files), the native feature providing that support is called an alternate data stream. Windows operating system features (such as the standard Summary tab in the Properties page for non-Office files) and Windows applications use them and Microsoft was developing a next-generation file system that has this sort of feature as basis.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    It's been a few years since I used a Mac, but even then resource forks weren't something you'd see outside of really old apps or some strange legacy use case, everything just used extended attributes or "sidecar" files (e.g. .DS_Store files in the case of Finder)

    Unlike Windows or Linux, macOS takes care to preserve xattrs when transferring the files, e.g. their archiver tool automatically converts them to sidecar AppleDouble files and stores them in a __MACOS folder alongside the base file in the archive, and reapplies them on extraction.

    If course nothing else does that, so if you've extracted a zip file or whatever and found that folder afterwards, that's what you're looking at.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent